Krakauer argues 'beauty' names universal, mechanistic laws while the 'interesting' is their noisy, emergent expression in finite systems. Complexity science, following Weaver and Anderson, serves as a bijection: it maps micro‑level rules to macro‑level organized complexity. This clarifies why elegant models often miss what matters in biology, economics, and society.
— It urges policymakers and modelers to privilege mappings that capture organized complexity, not just 'beautiful' simplicity—shaping debates in AI, epidemiology, and economic policy.
Ethan Siegel
2025.09.09
68% relevant
Siegel argues the quest for a single elegant equation (string-theory-style unification) likely misrepresents reality, aligning with the claim that elegant 'laws' often miss organized complexity and that we should value mappings that fit the real system over beauty.
Santa Fe Institute
2024.10.28
100% relevant
Krakauer: 'complexity science... has exactly this bijective character,' citing Weaver’s 'organized complexity,' Anderson’s 'More is Different,' and Kolmogorov/Chaitin/Bennett on algorithmic complexity.
← Back to All Ideas